Avatar

PuckLuck_77

Member Since
Mar. 7, 2019
Favourite Team
Los Angeles Kings
Forum Posts
1298
Posts per Day
1.1
Forum: Armchair-GMMay 21 at 7:28 p.m.
Forum: Armchair-GMMay 20 at 2:54 p.m.
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>T0R</b></div><div>I just don’t believe someone who looks like a steal of a 2nd rounder who might be almost a Top 10 pick in a redraft &amp; is nearly nhl ready without a moment in the AHL is the price for Roy?, Sorry you can love Matt Roy but no-one would trade their top prospect for him whether thats Holloway,Barron,Finley,Wolf.Suzuki,Lapierre. I can’t see any team giving up so much for Matt Roy i think a 1st &amp; 3rd is fair value maybe throw in a prospect but thats it,</div></div>

You have to look it from both team's perspectives.

Toronto is a team that needs to find a way to win today. LA is a team that wants to contend very soon.

You're asking LA to part with the Dman who was their top-pair guy for a significant portion of the season because Doughty was out. And he proved that he can anchor a top pair while getting a team to playoffs. He's a 25 minute munching guy that plays nearly all situations (PP being the only exception).

Why would a team like LA, trying to come out of their rebuild as soon as next season move someone like that?

Yes, Knies looks like he's going to be what you say. There's a reason why I, or a Kings GM in my opinion, would target him and I don't deny that. But despite looking the part, there's still inherent risk in a player who has only played college. There is 0 NHL experience there, or pro experience for that matter.

Matt Roy has done 25 minutes a night in the NHL consistently and proved it. The best way I have described him on here to another Toronto fan before, that I stand by, is this: "Matt Roy won't win the Norris. But he'll be the reason why Morgan Reilly wins the Norris." The improvement on Toronto's right side would be drastic in ways that don't always show up on the scoresheet.
Forum: Armchair-GMMay 20 at 12:14 p.m.
Forum: Armchair-GMMay 18 at 2:07 p.m.
Thread: For fun
Forum: Armchair-GMMay 18 at 1:41 p.m.
Thread: For fun
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>El_Dub</b></div><div>What do you think Toronto needs to add to each trade then to make them more realistic?</div></div>

I'll give you credit for adding in your top prospects (Robertson and Knies) to the deals instead of lesser guys. But let's go through each one:

Nashville -- After all the swaps, you're asking the Predators to take on $6.67 mil in cap hit (total) and taking away their two best prospects/young players in Jeannot and Askarov. Nylander is a good player, but Nashville still has to try to navigate signing Forsberg in addition to figuring out the path that the organization wants to take. This just isn't something that the Preds could do at all, regardless of what you added. At a certain point, Toronto runs out of assets.

LA -- Mrazek is a cap dump, plain and simple. You're asking the Kings to send you one of their franchise icons who just played an incredible season the year before he likely retires. And you're asking LA to retain on that trade AND add a pick to it. For starters, you've got the pick going the wrong direction. Next, it would have to be significantly better than a 4th rounder. And lastly, it just won't happen. LA isn't trading Quick.

Kane -- You're asking a team to retain nearly 6mil on a star player. For illustration purposes, it took a 1st rounder for Toronto to dump 6mil of Marleau's contract. Kane the player is worth the prospects and picks you have. Kane's retention is worth at least another 1st.

At least, that's how I view the trades.
Forum: Armchair-GMMay 17 at 7:21 p.m.
Forum: Armchair-GMMay 17 at 1:55 p.m.
Forum: Armchair-GMMay 17 at 1:29 p.m.
Thread: Buffalo
×